1959 Ford 17M vs. 1988 Mazda 626
To start off, 1988 Mazda 626 is newer by 29 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1959 Ford 17M. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1959 Ford 17M would be higher. At 1,998 cc (4 cylinders), 1988 Mazda 626 is equipped with a bigger engine.
Because 1959 Ford 17M is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1959 Ford 17M. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1988 Mazda 626, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control.
Compare all specifications:
1959 Ford 17M | 1988 Mazda 626 | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | 17M | 626 |
Year Released | 1959 | 1988 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1697 cc | 1998 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 3 valves |
Horse Power | 59 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 4460 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1680 mm | 1700 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1510 mm | 1370 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2610 mm | 2520 mm |